Segarra v. State
| Decision Date | 30 May 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 77-531,77-531 |
| Citation | 360 So.2d 79 |
| Parties | Miguel SEGARRA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Beth C. Weitzner, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before HENDRY and BARKDULL, JJ., and PARKER, J. GWYNN (Ret.), Associate Judge.
This is an appeal by the defendant, Miguel Segarra, from an order of revocation of probation, and a sentence to fifteen years in the state penitentiary.
The record reflects that defendant was charged by information with burglary. As a result of plea negotiations, it was agreed that defendant would plead guilty and that the maximum sentence he could receive would be five years in prison. This five year cap was stated on the record by the trial judge, and is reflected in writing on the court file jacket.
Following a pre-sentence investigation, the trial judge placed defendant on five years probation with two conditions: (1) that he serve one year in the county jail, and (2) that he complete TASC, a drug rehabilitation program. Subsequently, an affidavit of violation of probation was filed and an evidentiary hearing was held. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial judge found that defendant was "unsatisfactorily terminated" from the TASC program. An order of revocation of probation was entered and defendant was sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment.
The thrust of this appeal is that the trial court erred in imposing a sentence of fifteen years on violation of probation, where there had been an agreed maximum sentence of five years as a part of plea negotiations accepted and approved by and between defendant, prosecutor and judge. We agree.
In the leading Florida case, the Supreme Court held that a defendant placed on probation may be sentenced to imprisonment by the trial judge for the same period of years as the court could have imposed originally. State v. Jones, 327 So.2d 18 (Fla.1976), as modified by State v. Holmes, 360 So.2d 380 (Fla.1978).
While we recognize this to be the law of Florida, we do not find it to be directly applicable in the context of the instant case because the primary issue before us is not what the trial court might do in the absence of plea negotiations, but rather, the effect of plea negotiations and the agreed limitation of sentence. In this case, defendant's plea resulted from plea...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Finney v. State, 79-1936
...(Fla.1975); Freeman v. State, 376 So.2d 294 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); Richmond v. State, 375 So.2d 1132 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Segarra v. State, 360 So.2d 79 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978) rev'd on other grounds, 388 So.2d 1017 (Fla.1980); State ex rel. Wilhoit v. Wells, 356 So.2d 817 (Fla. 1st DCA), cert. den......
-
State v. Payne
...respondent asserted, he could not be sentenced to more than one year imprisonment. Relying upon its earlier decision in Segarra v. State, 360 So.2d 79 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), the district court agreed with respondent and reversed and remanded the case. Petitioner, the state, then sought review ......
-
State v. Segarra
...ADKINS, Justice. By petition for certiorari we have for review a decision of the Third District Court of Appeal Segarra v. State, 360 So.2d 79 (Fla.3d DCA 1978), which allegedly conflicts with a prior decision of another district court of appeal Mulder v. State, 356 So.2d 870 (Fla.4th DCA 1......
-
Bilyou v. State
...court of appeal, Payne v. State, 372 So.2d 152 (Fla.3d DCA 1979); Overman v. State, 368 So.2d 434 (Fla.3d DCA 1979); Segarra v. State, 360 So.2d 79 (Fla.3d DCA 1978), on the same point of law. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla.Const. Petitioner, Harry David Bilyou, was charged wi......